We need to emphasize the fact they're really, really assholes. Their pseudo morality & "offended" attitude is merely a disguise & their real intent is to attack & destroy anyone who dares even simply "poke fun" at one of their special protected identity groups. It's a throwback to the darkest days of religious fanaticism in which self-proclaimed "godly" people conduct witch hunts against anyone who violates or simply questions their dogma.

I'm so glad that person got fired. Unless you explain to me that the person was told to tweet that stuff. The tweet were bad jokes and at worse a distraction for a company that's doing everything else right. I'm sure the obvious people will turn this into a political fight\culture war, but at the end of the day does CD Project RED want their social media presence to be a place where trolling so-called SJWs is the thing they pride themselves in?

Member

There is just one glaring problem with this otherwise sensible and reasonable analysis.

If the criterion for "make the company look good" is to conduct yourself in such a way that it escapes unnoticed by a fringe of radicals then be ready to have your course dictated by them, and by any other small group at that. So will GOG re-hire the individual in question back if the backlash against his firing is loud enough?

There is a balancing act that has to be performed, all of us in marketing are aware of it (or should be aware of it, as its the difference between having a job and not). You have to push bounds enough to stay relevant and exciting, while also recognizing if you push too hard, or too inappropriate, or too much in a direction that upsets too many people, you risk failing at your mission and being released. The guy that did this already ran into the issue the first time CDR had to release an apology, they gave him more leeway than you normally see out of larger companies. That should have been a flag to stay clear of the topic.

Again I 100% think the backlash was uncalled for and no malice intent was ever meant by what was posted, but I also know I myself would be fired (the first time) if I did something like that. Even if my bosses felt I did nothing wrong, the company would let me walk to create a general illusion that they understand and rectified the public issue.

I'm so glad that person got fired. Unless you explain to me that the person was told to tweet that stuff. The tweet were bad jokes and at worse a distraction for a company that's doing everything else right. I'm sure the obvious people will turn this into a political fight\culture war, but at the end of the day does CD Project RED want their social media presence to be a place where trolling so-called SJWs is the thing they pride themselves in?

Someone in the PR team for GOG tweeted that "Your games #WontBeErased from GOG", but it happens that #WontBeErased was a hashtag used by transgender activists and trending at the moment, making the usual twitter tactics of including popular tweets to bump their visibility, or using the English words "won't" "be" "erased" in succession a transphobic hate crime that deserves indiscriminately doxing and targeting random GOG PR team members with death threats and personal harassment to their families which include husbands, wives, children and elderly people unrelated to this "crime", oh and terminated apparently.

The practice isn't that "unethical" for this same mob, since subverting and hijacking popular tweets is a favorite tactic of said "voices of sanity", see the Bowsette trend.

However some people can afford in this day to defend and justify going homicidal harasser stalker on people over "microagressions" that justify aggression as close to actual murder as possible (with the death threats, and trying to drive random people out of employment and try to keep them unemployed for as long as possible until they die in poverty from a curable illness with how the US health system is, and yes, that intent and hope was made explicit before by many prominent "voices of reason" who defend this), no, present it as a noble thing, over words that are not even offensive and that anyone could make "the mistake" of uttering if they're not up to date yet with the latest taboos and terrors.

But sure, death threats are totally equivalent to hashtag cultural appropriation (which isn't even proven to have been by the same persons doxxed and fired)

Yeah. Personally I don't find anything GOG posted particularly heinous. But the company twitter is not your personal platform for poking fun at contemporary sensitivities. If you don't have a sense of how your jokes are going to be received by the worldwide public (or you don't care), you shouldn't be in that role.

Is a firing justified? Well, from an American workforce point of view I'd say it was. He created a completely avoidable distraction for the company. Whatever inconvenience that produced for GOG seems to have outweighed his value to the team.

Member

The post above pretty much sums it up very well. But I'll add that if you want politics out of your games, it needs to go both ways. Also not a fan of the firing but the move is line with keeping that stuff out of their messaging.

But the company twitter is not your personal platform for poking fun at contemporary sensitivities. If you don't have a sense of how your jokes are going to be received by the worldwide public (or you don't care), you shouldn't be in that role.

Is a firing justified? Well, from an American workforce point of view I'd say it was. He created a completely avoidable distraction for the company. Whatever inconvenience that produced for GOG seems to have outweighed his value to the team.

I don't want the dude to die or anything, but at what point does purposely pissing off a percentage of your consumers matter? Like were those Tweets worth it? The last one was taken down within 10 minutes of him posting it, meaning that he probably never even expected to keep it up in the first place. Then to label the tweet with a #HowAboutThemHashtags like some kind of edge load. Like what was the point? Just to provoke for attention? Cyberpunk and GOG already have the attention now, no need to do silly stuff like that anymore.

Member

Whether it was a complete accident or a dumbass attempt to be edgy, his fate was his own. This dude needed to either do more research or not use company twitter as a personal platform to make jokes, because agree with what he did or not, he is representing the company.

Why should your opinion have any bearing on whether that individual was to be fired or not? Do you have anything more substantial than just your own taste in humour to support the claim he should have been fired?

and at worse a distraction for a company that's doing everything else right. I'm sure the obvious people will turn this into a political fight\culture war, but at the end of the day does CD Project RED want their social media presence to be a place where trolling so-called SJWs is the thing they pride themselves in?

Banned

I mean when the PR at star wars has been attacking the fans directly and costing serious falls in sales, things are dandy. But here there is no evidence this would have cost anything, the outrage may even have sparked sales.

Had the outrage mob not engaged in doxxing, I could see how moving him to another position would be acceptable if there's internal dislike of his activity, but once the outrage mob resorts to doxxing and death threats, I think it is a good policy not to cave to their demands when they do things that border on the illegal.

BTW, they better walk on eggshells with their latest game, if they want to appease this mob. The outrage mob will be looking at the most minute things to be offended at, they'll make a mountain out of just about any molehill.

Member

I distinctly remember you saying it was a deliberate marketing strategy by CDPR. So would this be an admission you were wrong or are you having tremendous trouble being consistent?

Why should your opinion have any bearing on whether that individual was to be fired or not? Do you have anything more substantial than just your own taste in humour to support the claim he should have been fired?

I would refer you back to the posts where it was so glaringly obvious to you this was A) a deliberate marketing strategy by CDPR and B ) a strategy that was working.

I'm assuming I was wrong when I said CDPR did this deliberately. I assume that because why would a social media manager just post stuff like that without the knowledge of his employer, while using the company's account on Twitter? That seems crazy!

And ultimately my opinion doesn't matter much, but clearly, collectively it mattered to CDPR. I'm curious why it took them this long to fire the guy. Or did they have "creative" differences on what CDPR's social presence should look like?

And when I said it was working for the company, I meant that with the context being "if their main goal is to make headlines" then it was working. I never meant it was working to help them sell more games. Tweeting that stuff at best is neutral and at worse, turns off a small percent of your fanbase.

Member

At the end of the day, they were just jokes. There were no guidelines or anything from CDP that he broke. Instead of removing him from as a company representative on Twitter they fired him. As well as removing him as the forum guy which many felt he was important for.

Member

They bent the knee, once again. And for what? To please a bunch of blue haired cucks on Twatter and CensorEra that don't buy their games anyway.
Hell, most of them said they were gonna cancel their Cyberpunk 2077 preorder while the game isn't even available for preorder yet.

Gold Member

Is that so? Have you seen the contract that was signed and/or worked at CDP yourself that you would know that this is the case, or is this pure conjecture? In the place where I work there are guidelines on how to act on our web presence and social media, and especially those who post on our social media account need to think twice about every single word they put out.

Member

I didn't find the jokes offensive, and I haven't seen them explained to be offensive in a single, coherent statement. Just a lot of people on ERA or Twitter saying that they are with no good explanation as to why. We shouldn't fire people because a loud minority on the internet find a joke to be offensive. People's livelihoods are worth more than fake outrage.

Member

Is that so? Have you seen the contract that was signed and/or worked at CDP yourself that you would know that this is the case, or is this pure conjecture? In the place where I work there are guidelines on how to act on our web presence and social media, and especially those who post on our social media account need to think twice about every single word they put out.

Because nothing was posted about it. This was a stealth firing. He was Fired straight after the tweet within a few hours IIRC. They wouldnt have been found out unil forum users noted he was missing. If they were in the right they would have made a public statement.

Member

We need to emphasize the fact they're really, really assholes. Their pseudo morality & "offended" attitude is merely a disguise & their real intent is to attack & destroy anyone who dares even simply "poke fun" at one of their special protected identity groups. It's a throwback to the darkest days of religious fanaticism in which self-proclaimed "godly" people conduct witch hunts against anyone who violates or simply questions their dogma.

Like how when Jessica Price said some mean things to a dude, an enormous mob of people jumped on her back? The subreddit suddenly lit up like a Christmas tree as it got flooded by people who had absolutely no prior post history there.

Let's not pretend this is one sided. Both sides of the fence thrives in mob culture and revels in taking down an "enemy". You can't accuse the one and pretend the other is innocent.

Member

Like how when Jessica Price said some mean things to a dude, an enormous mob of people jumped on her back? The subreddit suddenly lit up like a Christmas tree as it got flooded by people who had absolutely no prior post history there.

Let's not pretend this is one sided. Both sides of the fence thrives in mob culture and revels in taking down an "enemy". You can't accuse the one and pretend the other is innocent.

The never-ending waterfall of false equivalences continues. From the noble tradition that brought you "GAF is the mirror image of ERA", now comes the suggestion that insults and elliptic humour are one and the same thing, that doxing and not doxing can't be told apart and that one side, which is authoritarian by nature, is no more authoritarian than any other.

Member

Like how when Jessica Price said some mean things to a dude, an enormous mob of people jumped on her back? The subreddit suddenly lit up like a Christmas tree as it got flooded by people who had absolutely no prior post history there.

Let's not pretend this is one sided. Both sides of the fence thrives in mob culture and revels in taking down an "enemy". You can't accuse the one and pretend the other is innocent.

Gold Member

Because nothing was posted about it. This was a stealth firing. He was Fired straight after the tweet within a few hours IIRC. They wouldnt have been found out unil forum users noted he was missing. If they were in the right they would have made a public statement.

So you have actually no idea if he broke any guidelines, you posted pure conjecture. Bottom line: you are angry at GOG because they did not get your written consent before making a management decision that resulted in "stealthily"* letting an employee go, hence you vent your frustrations here and vow never to buy from GOG again? Fair enough.

* it would be news to me that every company posts public statements about hirings and firings of their employees, I'll be having a look if GOG did make public statement about any previous firings or employees (they exist since 2008, they must have fired someone at some point), but I'm not holding my breath.

Offence is in the eye of the beholder. The mob response to Jessica Price was ridiculously disproportionate, just like the mob response was disproportionate to the GOG dude. But each side will believe their cause is righteous and true and it was "right" of them to get their "enemy" fired.

I laughed when Price got fired, because I don't like regressive politics and it was funny to see someone like that get knocked down a peg. But it doesn't change the fact that Arenanet's response was heavy handed. Companies don't like bad press or the people who bring it on them. Whether you think the dude's jokes were harmless is irrelevant. He brought them bad press, so he got shitcanned. Jessica Price brought Anet bad press, so she got shitcanned.

I'd say in this case it's made worse by the fact that a community manager should know better in 2018. I'm digging really hard, but I just can't seem to find that nugget of sympathy I'm supposed to have for this guy.

How about you go ask your boss where the line is drawn. Or better yet, go make some anti-SJW jokes on LinkedIn. See how your boss feels about that.

I don't know where my boss draws the line, but regardless of whether I think certain things are offensive or not, I'm not going to risk my job by posting anything that could end up being controversial while I'm representing my employer.

Sorry this dude had to learn that lesson the hard way, but that's the way it is. You are beholden to your employer.

So you have actually no idea if he broke any guidelines, you posted pure conjecture. Bottom line: you are angry at GOG because they did not get your written consent before making a management decision that resulted in "stealthily"* letting an employee go, hence you vent your frustrations here and vow never to buy from GOG again? Fair enough.

* it would be news to me that every company posts public statements about hirings and firings of their employees, I'll be having a look if GOG did make public statement about any previous firings or employees (they exist since 2008, they must have fired someone at some point), but I'm not holding my breath.

I'm terribly sorry but you are mistaking the nature of the issue - what constitutes offense - and the practicality of the issue - that CDPR has the right to conduct their PR the way they see fit. The latter says nothing about the former.[/QUOTE]

Vincit qui se vincit

Like how when Jessica Price said some mean things to a dude, an enormous mob of people jumped on her back? The subreddit suddenly lit up like a Christmas tree as it got flooded by people who had absolutely no prior post history there.

Let's not pretend this is one sided. Both sides of the fence thrives in mob culture and revels in taking down an "enemy". You can't accuse the one and pretend the other is innocent.